Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
28
[DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL]
-1-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 2 of 28 Page ID #:2
1 6. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
2 Defendants INOVIT and WHEELS OUTLET USA are undercapitalized.
3 7. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
4 Defendants INOVIT and WHEELS OUTLET USA have failed to observe corporate
5 formalities required by law.
6 8. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
7 Defendants INOVIT and WHEELS OUTLET USA are the alter ego of Defendant
8 MAO.
9 9. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
10 Defendant MAO is an individual residing in and conducting business from Los
11 Angeles County, California.
12 10. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
13 Defendant MAO is an owner, operator, member, officer and manager of Defendants
14 INOVIT and WHEELS OUTLET USA, and the moving force behind the actions of
15 Defendants INOVIT and WHEELS OUTLET USA complained of herein.
16 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
17 Defendants INOVIT, WHEELS OUTLET USA, MAO, and Does 1-10, inclusive,
18 and each of them, were the agents, partners, joint venturers, servants, and employees
19 of every other defendant and the acts of each defendant, as alleged herein, were
20 performed within the course and scope of that agency, partnership, joint venture,
21 service or employment.
22 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
23 Defendants INOVIT, WHEELS OUTLET USA, MAO, and Does 1-10, inclusive,
24 sued herein by fictitious names, are jointly, severally and concurrently liable and
25 responsible with one another upon the causes of action hereinafter set forth.
26 13. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate
27 or otherwise, of defendants herein identified as Does 1-10, inclusive, are unknown
28 to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs therefore sue said Doe defendants by such fictitious names,
-3-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 4 of 28 Page ID #:4
1 and when the true names and capacities of said Doe defendants are ascertained,
2 Plaintiffs will seek to amend this pleading accordingly.
3 JURISDICTION / VENUE
4 14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to
5 the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq., 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and/or 1338(a), and
6 supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§
7 1367(a) and 1338(b).
8 15. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Defendants INOVIT
9 and MAO inasmuch as INOVIT is a California corporation, and MAO is an
10 individual residing in and conducting business from the State of California.
11 16. This Court has specific personal jurisdiction over Defendant WHEELS
12 OUTLET USA inasmuch as it has committed the tortious activities of trademark
13 infringement and design patent infringement alleged in this Complaint by
14 purposefully directing its infringement activities to retailers/buyers in the State of
15 California. Defendant WHEELS OUTLET USA has sufficient minimum contacts
16 with California such that the exercise of jurisdiction over it by this Court does not
17 offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
18 17. In addition, Plaintiff BMW NA has significant contacts with the State
19 of California. For example, Plaintiff BMW NA’s Technology Office, Western
20 Region Office, Group Representative Office, Engineering and Emission Test Center,
21 and Training Center are all located in California. In addition, Plaintiff BMW NA
22 operates a Vehicle Distribution Center (one of four) and Parts Distribution Centers
23 (two of six) in California. Plaintiff BMW NA also has more than fifty (50)
24 dealerships throughout the State of California.
25 18. Venue is proper in this district, inter alia, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
26 1391(b) because, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that a
27 substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to these claims occurred within
28 this District, and has caused damage to Plaintiffs in this District.
-4-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 5 of 28 Page ID #:5
1 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
2 Plaintiffs and the Famous BMW Trademarks and Products
3 19. Plaintiffs are in the business of designing, manufacturing, and
4 distributing motor vehicles, motor vehicle parts and accessories, sold under various
5 trademarks, including but not limited to:
6 a. the “BMW” word mark, the BMW logo and BMW model names,
7 such as 3 SERIES, 5 SERIES, and 7 SERIES (collectively “BMW Marks”); and
8 b. the M logo and M model names such as M2, M3, M4, M5, and
9 M6 (collectively “BMW M Marks”).
10 20. Plaintiffs’ products and marks have achieved great success since their
11 introduction in commerce in the United States continuously since as early as 1955
12 for the BMW brand and since as early as 1987 for the BMW M brand.
13 21. BMW also provides numerous services, such as maintenance and repair
14 services, financing, leasing, insurance and warranty services. BMW also sells a wide
15 variety of merchandise bearing the BMW and BMW M Marks, including but not
16 limited to apparel, mugs, bags, toys, pens and watches. BMW has manufactured,
17 marketed and sold millions of vehicles in the United States.
18 22. Plaintiffs have for decades utilized a network of authorized dealers in
19 the United States to market both new and certified pre-owned BMW and BMW M
20 vehicles, vehicle parts, accessories, and merchandise, and services such as rental,
21 financing, and maintenance services. BMW currently has more than 340 authorized
22 dealers in the United States.
23 23. Plaintiffs’ commercial success under the BMW and BMW M Marks in
24 the United States and around the world has been tremendous. Plaintiffs have sold
25 many billions of dollars of products and services under the BMW and BMW M
26 Marks in the United States over the years. Plaintiffs’ motor vehicles and related
27 motor vehicle parts and accessories have earned a reputation for innovation, quality
28 and performance and have won numerous awards in the industry in the United States
-5-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 6 of 28 Page ID #:6
23
4293991 Automobiles, motorcycles and sports
2-26-2013 utility vehicles and their parts namely
24 structural parts, engines, wheels,
25 transmissions, windshields, differentials,
fenders, drive belts, gears, axles, brakes
26 and braking systems, chassis, badges,
27 bumpers, vehicle seats, trunks, side
mirrors, rear view mirrors, steering wheels,
28 shock absorbers, safety belts, rims for
-8-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 9 of 28 Page ID #:9
- 10 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 11 of 28 Page ID #:11
19
5522663 Automobiles and their structural parts;
7-24-2018 bicycles; parts of automobiles, namely,
20 engines, wheels, steering wheels, door sills
21
being strips of metal affixed to the
automobile sill, gear shift knobs, headrests,
22 seat, tire valve steam caps, license plate
23 frames, car badges, namely, vehicle
identification badges and automobile hood
24 ornaments; automotive body kits
25 comprising external structural parts of
automobiles (class 12);
26 Floor mats in class 27;
27 Various other goods and services in classes
7, 9, 14, 16, 18, 25, 28, 35, 37 and 41.
28
- 11 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 12 of 28 Page ID #:12
- 12 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 13 of 28 Page ID #:13
1 36. Plaintiff BMW AG owns various valid and lawfully issued United
2 States Design Patents, including but not limited to wheel design patent nos.:
3 D696,178; D792,315; D560,585; D758,943; D748,560; D615,018; D671,473;
4 D686,128; D826,128; D630,564; D661,239; D621,770; D697,007; and D686,130
5 (collectively the “BMW Design Patents”).
6 Defendants’ Infringing Conduct
7 37. Beginning on a date that is unknown to Plaintiffs and continuing to the
8 present, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that Defendants
9 have, without the consent of Plaintiffs, imported, offered for sale, sold and
10 distributed infringing replica BMW wheels to consumers that were publicly
11 displayed and sold using the BMW Trademarks in advertising, and that embody the
12 BMW Design Patents, that were not manufactured by Plaintiffs or any manufacturer
13 authorized by Plaintiffs.
14 38. On December 31, 2015, Plaintiffs and Defendant INOVIT entered into
15 a Settlement Agreement to resolve Plaintiffs’ prior claims against Defendant
16 INOVIT stemming from its purchasing, importing, offering for sale, sale, and
17 distribution of counterfeit, pirated, infringing or otherwise unauthorized automobile
18 wheel rims embodying and comprised of BMW’s design patents with counterfeit
19 center caps and badges bearing BMW’s trademarks in the case BMW of North
20 America, LLC, et al. v. Autosports European, et al., Case No.: 2:14-cv-07961 SJO
21 (PJWx) filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
22 39. On January 29, 2016, the Court entered a Permanent Injunction against
23 Defendant INOVIT pursuant to the December 31, 2015 Settlement Agreement
24 entered into between Plaintiffs and Defendant INOVIT [ECF Dkt. 82, BMW of North
25 America, LLC, et al. v. Autosports European, et al.].
26 40. On or about October 2, 2018, U.S. Customs and Border Protection
27 seized 468 labels and emblems bearing BMW Trademarks at the Port of Entry in
28 Tampa, Florida being imported into the United States by WHEELS OUTLET, 8455
- 13 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 14 of 28 Page ID #:14
1 47. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
2 Defendants regularly and systematically advertised, marketed, distributed and sold
3 a presently unknown quantity of automobile wheels embodying and comprised of
4 BMW Design Patents and using BMW Trademarks in advertising.
5 48. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
6 through such business activities, Defendants have purposefully derived benefit from
7 their interstate commerce activities by expressly targeting foreseeable purchasers in
8 the State of California and throughout the United States.
9 49. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
10 Defendants violated and continue to violate Plaintiffs’ exclusive rights to the BMW
11 Trademarks and use images and marks that are identical to and/or confusing similar
12 to the BMW Trademarks to confuse consumers and aid in the promotion and sale of
13 infringing replica BMW wheel rims.
14 50. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
15 Defendants’ infringing uses of BMW Trademarks and BMW Design Patents in
16 commerce began long after Plaintiffs’ adoption and use of the BMW Trademarks
17 and BMW Design Patents, after Plaintiffs obtained the trademark and design patent
18 registrations alleged above, and after the BMW Trademarks became famous. Neither
19 Plaintiffs nor any of Plaintiffs’ authorized agents have consented to Defendants’ use
20 of Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks or BMW Design Patents.
21 51. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that despite
22 their prior Settlement Agreement with Defendant INOVIT and written notice to
23 Defendants to cease and desist from further dealings in infringing products bearing
24 BMW Trademarks and/or embodying BMW Design Patents, Defendants continue
25 to violate Plaintiffs’ exclusive rights in and to the BMW Trademarks and BMW
26 Design Patents.
27 52. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
28 Defendants’ actions were committed intentionally, in bad faith and with the intent
- 15 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 16 of 28 Page ID #:16
1 to dilute Plaintiffs’ marks, and to cause confusion and mistake, and to deceive the
2 consuming public and the public at large as to the source, sponsorship and/or
3 affiliation of Defendants. Through their wrongful conduct, Defendants have directly
4 traded upon and diminished Plaintiffs’ goodwill.
5 53. In committing these acts, all of which have and will continue to cause
6 irreparable harm to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis
7 allege, that Defendants have, among other things, willfully and in bad faith: (i)
8 infringed, tarnished, diluted Plaintiffs’ rights in the BMW Trademarks and BMW
9 Design Patents; (ii) used counterfeit BMW Trademarks; (iii) misled the public into
10 believing there is an association or connection between Defendants and Plaintiffs
11 and/or the products advertised and sold by Defendants and Plaintiffs; (iv) misled the
12 public into believing that Plaintiffs endorse Defendants products; (v) used false
13 designations of origin on or in connection with its goods and services; (vi) infringed
14 upon the BMW Design Patents; and (vii) profited unfairly from such activity. Unless
15 enjoined, Defendants will continue to cause irreparable harm to Plaintiffs.
16 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
17 (Infringement of Registered Trademarks & Counterfeiting by Defendants
18 INOVIT INC., WHEELS OUTLET USA LLC d/b/a INOVIT EAST COAST,
19 YINGSHEN (VICTOR) MAO, and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive)
20 [15 U.S.C. § 1114/Lanham Act § 32(a)]
21 54. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference each of the other allegations
22 set forth elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.
23 55. Plaintiffs have continuously used the BMW Trademarks in interstate
24 commerce.
25 56. Plaintiff BMW AG, as the exclusive owner of all right, title and interest
26 in and to the BMW Trademarks, and Plaintiff BMW NA as an authorized licensee
27 to use the BMW Trademarks in the United States with consent from Plaintiff BMW
28 AG, have standing to maintain an action for trademark infringement under 15 U.S.C.
- 16 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 17 of 28 Page ID #:17
1 §1114.
2 57. Defendants did not and failed to obtain the consent or authorization of
3 Plaintiffs as the registered owners of the BMW Trademarks to deal in and
4 commercially import, sell and/or distribute products bearing the BMW Trademarks
5 in commerce.
6 58. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
7 Defendants are and at the time of their actions complained of herein were actually
8 aware that Plaintiffs are the registered trademark holders of the BMW Trademarks.
9 59. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
10 Defendants intentionally and knowingly used in commerce reproductions,
11 counterfeits, copies and/or colorable imitations of Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks to
12 offer for sale, sell and distribute counterfeit goods bearing BMW Trademarks to
13 consumers online.
14 60. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
15 Defendants imported, transported, offered for sale, sold and distributed counterfeit
16 goods bearing Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks in commerce in connection with the
17 sale, offering for sale, distribution, and/or advertising of counterfeit goods bearing
18 Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks.
19 61. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
20 Defendants’ egregious and intentional importation, sale and/or distribution of
21 counterfeit goods bearing Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks is likely to cause confusion,
22 or to cause mistake, or to deceive, mislead, betray, and defraud consumers who
23 believe that Defendants’ items are authentic products manufactured by Plaintiffs
24 and/or authorized manufacturers.
25 62. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
26 Defendants’ acts have been committed with knowledge of Plaintiffs’ exclusive rights
27 and goodwill in the BMW Trademarks, as well as with bad faith and the intent to
28 cause confusion or to cause mistake and to deceive.
- 17 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 18 of 28 Page ID #:18
1 63. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
2 Plaintiffs have suffered and will continue to suffer substantial and irreparable injury,
3 loss and damage to their rights in and to the BMW Trademarks and the goodwill
4 associated therewith, for which it has no adequate remedy at law; thus, Plaintiffs
5 request injunctive relief.
6 64. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
7 Defendants’ continued knowing and willful importation, sale and distribution of
8 goods bearing Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks without Plaintiffs’ consent or
9 authorization constitutes intentional infringement of Plaintiffs’ federally registered
10 trademarks in violation of Section 32 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1114. Based
11 on such conduct, Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief as well as monetary
12 damages, and other remedies provided by section 1116, 1117, and 1118, including
13 Defendants’ profits, treble damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, statutory
14 damages and/or prejudgment interest.
15 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
16 (False Designation of Origin & Unfair Competition against Defendants
17 INOVIT INC., WHEELS OUTLET USA LLC d/b/a INOVIT EAST COAST,
18 YINGSHEN (VICTOR) MAO, and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive)
19 [15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)/Lanham Act § 43(a)]
20 65. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference each of the other allegations
21 set forth elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.
22 66. Plaintiffs, as the owners of all common law right, title, and interest in
23 and to the BMW Trademarks, have standing to maintain an action for false
24 designation of origin and unfair competition under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act
25 (15 U.S.C. § 1125).
26 67. Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks are inherently distinctive and/or have
27 otherwise acquired distinctiveness.
28 ///
- 18 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 19 of 28 Page ID #:19
1 68. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
2 Defendants have without authorization, on or in connection with its goods and
3 services, used in commerce marks that are confusingly similar to the asserted marks,
4 and/or have made false designations of origin which are likely to cause confusion or
5 cause mistake or to deceive as to the affiliation, connection or association of
6 Defendants with Plaintiffs, and/or as to the origin, sponsorship or approval of
7 Defendants’ goods or services or commercial activities.
8 69. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
9 Defendants’ conduct described above violates the Lanham Act, and Defendants have
10 unfairly competed with and injured and, unless immediately restrained, will continue
11 to injure Plaintiffs, causing damage to Plaintiffs in an amount to be determined at
12 trial, and will cause irreparable injury to Plaintiffs’ goodwill and reputation
13 associated with the value of Plaintiffs’ marks.
14 70. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that the
15 conduct of Defendants has been knowing, deliberate, willful, intended to cause
16 confusion, or to cause mistake or to deceive and in blatant disregard of Plaintiffs’
17 rights.
18 71. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
19 Defendants knew, or by the exercise of reasonable care should have known, that
20 their adoption and commencement of use in commerce and continuing use of marks
21 that are confusingly similar to and constitute a counterfeit reproduction of Plaintiffs’
22 BMW Trademarks would cause confusion, mistake, or deception among purchasers,
23 users and the public.
24 72. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
25 Defendants’ egregious and intentional use, sale and distribution of fake, pirated and
26 counterfeit automobile products bearing Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks unfairly
27 competes with Plaintiffs and is likely to cause confusion, mistake, or to deceive,
28 mislead, betray, and defraud consumers to believe that the substandard imitations
- 19 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 20 of 28 Page ID #:20
1 77. Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks are distinctive, and the BMW Marks are
2 famous within the meaning of the Lanham Act.
3 78. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
4 Defendants’ unlawful actions began long after Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks became
5 famous, and Defendants acted knowingly, deliberately and willfully with the intent
6 to trade on Plaintiffs’ reputation and to dilute Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks.
7 Defendants’ conduct is willful, wanton and egregious.
8 79. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
9 Defendants’ intentional importation, transportation, sale and/or distribution of fake,
10 pirated, and counterfeit items bearing Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks is likely to cause
11 confusion, mistake, or to deceive, mislead, betray, and defraud consumers to believe
12 that the substandard imitations are genuine BMW products. The actions of
13 Defendants complained of herein have diluted and will continue to dilute the BMW
14 Trademarks and other marks, and are likely to impair the distinctiveness, strength
15 and value of Plaintiffs’ BMW Trademarks, and injure the business reputation of
16 Plaintiffs and their marks.
17 80. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
18 Defendants’ acts have caused and will continue to cause Plaintiffs irreparable harm.
19 Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to compensate it fully for the damages
20 that have been caused and which will continue to be caused by Defendants’ unlawful
21 acts, unless they are enjoined by this Court.
22 81. As the acts alleged herein constitute a willful violation of section 43(c)
23 of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. section 1125(c), Plaintiffs are informed and believe,
24 and on that basis allege, that they are entitled to injunctive relief as well as monetary
25 damages and other remedies provided by 15 U.S.C. §§ 1116, 1117, 1118, and
26 1125(c), including Defendants’ profits, actual and statutory damages, treble
27 damages, reasonable attorney’s fees, costs and prejudgment interest.
28 ///
- 21 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 22 of 28 Page ID #:22
1 BMW Trademarks, Defendants intended to, did, and will continue to induce
2 customers to purchase counterfeit products by trading off the extensive goodwill
3 built up by Plaintiffs in the BMW Trademarks.
4 87. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that the
5 conduct of Defendants has been knowing, deliberate, willful, intended to cause
6 confusion, or to cause mistake or to deceive, and in disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights.
7 88. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
8 Defendants’ wrongful conduct, as alleged above, has permitted and will permit them
9 to make substantial profits on the strength of Plaintiffs’ nationwide marketing,
10 advertising, sales and consumer recognition. As a direct and proximate result of
11 Defendants’ wrongful conduct, as alleged herein, Plaintiffs have been and will be
12 deprived of substantial sales of their products in an amount as yet unknown but to
13 be determined at trial, and have been and will be deprived of the value of the BMW
14 Trademarks as commercial assets, in an amount as yet unknown but to be determined
15 at trial. Plaintiffs seek restitution in this matter, including an order granting
16 Defendants’ profits stemming from their infringing activity, and their actual and/or
17 compensatory damages.
18 89. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
19 Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law for Defendants’ continuing violation of
20 its rights set forth above. Plaintiffs seek injunctive relief.
21 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
22 (Federal Design Patent Infringement against Defendants INOVIT INC.,
23 WHEELS OUTLET USA LLC d/b/a INOVIT EAST COAST, YINGSHEN
24 (VICTOR) MAO, and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive)
25 [35 U.S.C. § 271]
26 90. Plaintiffs hereby incorporate by reference each of the other allegations
27 set forth elsewhere in this Complaint as though fully set forth in this cause of action.
28 ///
- 23 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 24 of 28 Page ID #:24
1 91. Plaintiffs are the owners of the BMW Design Patents with the USPTO
2 registration numbers: D696,178; D792,315; D560,585; D758,943; D748,560;
3 D615,018; D671,473; D686,128; D826,128; D630,564; D661,239; D621,770;
4 D697,007; and D686,130.
5 92. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
6 Defendants have infringed and continue to infringe the BMW Design Patents by
7 using, selling and/or offering to sell, within the United States and/or importing into
8 the United States, wheels which embody the design covered by Plaintiffs’ patents.
9 93. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
10 Defendants’ infringing products include all of the ornamental designs of the BMW
11 Design Patents. By their conduct, Defendants have violated 35 U.S.C. § 271 by
12 direct infringement of the BMW Design Patents and by inducing others to infringe
13 the BMW Design Patents.
14 94. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
15 Defendants have earned profits by virtue of their infringement of the BMW Design
16 Patents.
17 95. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that as a
18 direct and legal result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Plaintiffs have been and
19 will be irreparably and permanently harmed; wherefore Plaintiffs are without an
20 adequate remedy at law. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to, among other things,
21 an order enjoining and restraining Defendants from further engaging in infringement
22 of the BMW Design Patents.
23 96. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege, that
24 Defendants infringement of the BMW Design Patents is and has been willful.
25 Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to monetary damages, in an amount to be proven
26 at trial, an award of treble damages, and their reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
27 ///
28 ///
- 24 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 25 of 28 Page ID #:25
- 27 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Case 2:20-cv-08696 Document 1 Filed 09/22/20 Page 28 of 28 Page ID #:28
- 28 -
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES